And yes drop-off, or mail-in ballot versus voting-at-the-polling-station votes.
The key says “total vote” not polling-station votes, but sure.
I read it like: 10 drop off votes vs 10 polling station votes = 0% difference.
Total in-person votes amounted to about 6% of the total vote. All of the numbers should be massively negative by your interpretation. If you lump mail-in and drop-off votes together, then you get just under a million votes compared to 1.5 million drop-off votes. The results of your interpretation should still skew mostly negative, but the chart is mostly positive. You have made assumptions about the charts that are not in the description and that make the chart obviously wrong.
Again I say, the whole thing is a mess, which makes me think that they don’t really want people to understand it.
We’ll just have to disagree on that then. I’m not saying I’m an expert, I’m saying the known vote counts in the following examples are all we need to know to warrant a further look:
Well, the fact that we had an election warrants a further look. I’m just saying that it should be looked at by people who won’t make obvious mistakes like you just did. At some point we play a role
Those numbers would not be esoteric symbol-strewn formulas, they’d be, like “5%”.
Tell me you know nothing about statistical modeling without telling me you know nothing about statistical modeling. If you were to take any large random list of numbers, you could find all sorts of patterns that aren’t there. Any experience at large statistics at all would have red flags flying any time someone picks out a very particular view when presenting data - especially if they obscure how exactly that view was obtained. Why 2016 and not 2020 or 2012? Why only Ohio? Why present the data this way and not some other way? Why make the key so confusing?
I’m not saying that there isn’t something here, but the information this organization is presenting doesn’t support that conclusion at all. If anything, it calls attention to how much obfuscation it takes to even make the case.
I don’t know why you gave me the Wikipedia link, but the other link has exactly what I just said. This is straight from what you (and previously I) linked to:
Six percent of early voting was done via a ballot drop box.
In any case, 18% wouldn’t change anything I said. With that, I’m done doing silly analysis just to show that there is no point in us doing silly analysis.
OH. The next article in the series explains it. “Drop off” meaning the drop between Presidential selection and the next-most powerful office. In this case Pres - Senator.
The data above reflects what’s commonly referred to as the “drop-off”—the difference between the number of votes cast for the presidential race and those cast for the next down-ballot race within the same party.
In mail-in voting, Harris and Trump show similar drop-off rates (1.48% vs. 1.96%), which aligns with expected voter behavior. But on Election Day, the numbers diverge sharply: Trump’s drop-off rate skyrockets to 4.51%, while Harris’ plummets to 0.87%.
That kind of disparity is impossible to ignore. According to this data—on Election Day only—voters selected Democrats down-ballot, then flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket.
Then we’re back to my original objection to the first charts. In a time of strong anti-establishment sentiment, an establishment candidate is more likely to underperform down ballot races, and an anti-establishment candidate is more likely to outperform down ballot races - especially in a purple/swing state.
Which also brings me back to my original point that this is not a theory of interest to leftist voters - both because we already know why it happened, and because it provides cover for neoliberals trying to hide from the utter collapse of their ideology.
The press doesn’t know how to differentiate between extremist neoliberals and the far left, so the far left gets saddled with extremist neoliberal nonsense.
Yeah I know, every leftist wants to see the Democrats collapse because they can’t wish the same on the republiQans.
IF there’s anything to this, it means the Democrats won, though and leftists would get a lot of what they want. That they don’t care about that is all we need to know as it comes to midterms.
Yeah I know, every leftist wants to see the Democrats collapse because they can’t wish the same on the republiQans.
You got it backwards. Leftists want the Democrats to abandon neoliberalism so that they won’t collapse. There is a fringe (not me) that wants the Democrats to collapse in favor of a third party, but they also want to destroy the Republicans.
IF there’s anything to this, it means the Democrats won, though and leftists would get a lot of what they want.
We never have before, and the Democrats don’t campaign on it, so I highly doubt it. Most Democratic administrations result in less of what Leftists want, not more. Not as bad as Republican administrations, but the last President to really move the country left was FDR. Biden did too, but he barely even tried to undo the previous Trump administration.
To be clear, Democrats are far better than Republicans for the left, but it’s not because we expect to get any of what we want from either.
Of course that’s a big, if interesting, if.
Kinda like “if monkeys come flying out of my ass”. Even so, it’s hardly all that interesting. We still won’t understand how Trump won in 2016. We still won’t understand the rising tide of fascism in the US and the rest of the neoliberal world. We’ll be no closer to taking back Congress in 2026, or doing anything with our proof of election fraud without it.
At the absolute best this would prove that Trump is a criminal running a criminal administration who should be removed from office. We can already prove that a dozen different ways, yet there he still is. I’m not “interested” in expending time, resources, or political capital on a witch-hunt that even Kamala and Walz don’t find valuable.
The Wiki link is the total. The drop-off total is in the first link.
It equals 18% because it includes the mail ins, which - doesn’t limit to drop-offs and yeah they used the term “drop off” so in that case it would be 6%
If the counties were identified we could maybe get a better number.
Fair enough, you think election numbers need to be vetted by experts to tell us how they’re arrived at and for some cases I don’t necessariy disagree. I’m just saying with enough data we could do some of it.
The key says “total vote” not polling-station votes, but sure.
Total in-person votes amounted to about 6% of the total vote. All of the numbers should be massively negative by your interpretation. If you lump mail-in and drop-off votes together, then you get just under a million votes compared to 1.5 million drop-off votes. The results of your interpretation should still skew mostly negative, but the chart is mostly positive. You have made assumptions about the charts that are not in the description and that make the chart obviously wrong.
Again I say, the whole thing is a mess, which makes me think that they don’t really want people to understand it.
Well, the fact that we had an election warrants a further look. I’m just saying that it should be looked at by people who won’t make obvious mistakes like you just did. At some point we play a role
Tell me you know nothing about statistical modeling without telling me you know nothing about statistical modeling. If you were to take any large random list of numbers, you could find all sorts of patterns that aren’t there. Any experience at large statistics at all would have red flags flying any time someone picks out a very particular view when presenting data - especially if they obscure how exactly that view was obtained. Why 2016 and not 2020 or 2012? Why only Ohio? Why present the data this way and not some other way? Why make the key so confusing?
I’m not saying that there isn’t something here, but the information this organization is presenting doesn’t support that conclusion at all. If anything, it calls attention to how much obfuscation it takes to even make the case.
94% of the vote was drop off / mail in? Please share your link.
Brain fart. Drop-off was 6%. The link I already shared has that.
It’s more like 18%
I don’t know why you gave me the Wikipedia link, but the other link has exactly what I just said. This is straight from what you (and previously I) linked to:
In any case, 18% wouldn’t change anything I said. With that, I’m done doing silly analysis just to show that there is no point in us doing silly analysis.
OH. The next article in the series explains it. “Drop off” meaning the drop between Presidential selection and the next-most powerful office. In this case Pres - Senator.
Then we’re back to my original objection to the first charts. In a time of strong anti-establishment sentiment, an establishment candidate is more likely to underperform down ballot races, and an anti-establishment candidate is more likely to outperform down ballot races - especially in a purple/swing state.
Which also brings me back to my original point that this is not a theory of interest to leftist voters - both because we already know why it happened, and because it provides cover for neoliberals trying to hide from the utter collapse of their ideology.
The press doesn’t know how to differentiate between extremist neoliberals and the far left, so the far left gets saddled with extremist neoliberal nonsense.
Yeah I know, every leftist wants to see the Democrats collapse because they can’t wish the same on the republiQans.
IF there’s anything to this, it means the Democrats won, though and leftists would get a lot of what they want. That they don’t care about that is all we need to know as it comes to midterms.
Of course that’s a big, if interesting, if.
You got it backwards. Leftists want the Democrats to abandon neoliberalism so that they won’t collapse. There is a fringe (not me) that wants the Democrats to collapse in favor of a third party, but they also want to destroy the Republicans.
We never have before, and the Democrats don’t campaign on it, so I highly doubt it. Most Democratic administrations result in less of what Leftists want, not more. Not as bad as Republican administrations, but the last President to really move the country left was FDR. Biden did too, but he barely even tried to undo the previous Trump administration.
To be clear, Democrats are far better than Republicans for the left, but it’s not because we expect to get any of what we want from either.
Kinda like “if monkeys come flying out of my ass”. Even so, it’s hardly all that interesting. We still won’t understand how Trump won in 2016. We still won’t understand the rising tide of fascism in the US and the rest of the neoliberal world. We’ll be no closer to taking back Congress in 2026, or doing anything with our proof of election fraud without it.
At the absolute best this would prove that Trump is a criminal running a criminal administration who should be removed from office. We can already prove that a dozen different ways, yet there he still is. I’m not “interested” in expending time, resources, or political capital on a witch-hunt that even Kamala and Walz don’t find valuable.
The Wiki link is the total. The drop-off total is in the first link.
It equals 18% because it includes the mail ins, which - doesn’t limit to drop-offs and yeah they used the term “drop off” so in that case it would be 6%
If the counties were identified we could maybe get a better number.
Fair enough, you think election numbers need to be vetted by experts to tell us how they’re arrived at and for some cases I don’t necessariy disagree. I’m just saying with enough data we could do some of it.